The Role of Criticism in Growth Theory, 1939-1986

Hans Werner Holub, Veronoika V. Eberharter and Gottfried Tappeiner
Additional contact information
Hans Werner Holub: Universität Innsbruck, Institut für Wirtschaftstheorie, Wirtschaftspolitik und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Universitätsstr. 15/3, Innsbruck, Austria
Veronoika V. Eberharter: Universität Innsbruck, Institut für Wirtschaftstheorie, Wirtschaftspolitik und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Universitätsstr. 15/3, Innsbruck, Austria
Gottfried Tappeiner: Universität Innsbruck, Institut für Wirtschaftstheorie, Wirtschaftspolitik und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Universitätsstr. 15/3, Innsbruck, Austria

Homo Oeconomicus, 2004, vol. 20, pages 437-448

Abstract: This paper provides an analysis of the role of criticism in economics, exemplified with journal articles on modern growth theory, published between 1939 and 1986 in 47 economic journals. Critical (-) articles according to our definition either are critical keynotes to articles, or point out the weakness of the growth model, or consider the shortcomings of other critical articles. We found a decreasing propensity to criticize at the end of the life-cycle of modern growth theory, expressed by the number of articles and the market shares of -articles. Criticism does not encourage a debate on the criticized theoretical aspects, but is broadly ignored in the scientific community. The empirical results do not support the hypothesis, that criticism leads to scientific knowledge and to new paradigms.

Date: 2004

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hom:homoec:v:20:y:2004:p:437-448

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Homo Oeconomicus from Institute of SocioEconomics
Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by Matthew Braham (). This e-mail address is bad, please contact .